Archeaological evidence for the Bible

[angellous_evangellous]

Ok, fair enough.

I guess what I'm asking then, is there any evidence at all that could be considered to argue for the accuracy and validity of the Bible? Or is this thread a complete waste of time?

The book of Jeremiah is largely verifiable in ancient Egyptian and Babylonain writings. It's the only one I know of that is...

 

[Hope]

For me, the simple fact that the Babylonian, Indian, Egyptian and Chinese civilizations thrived before, during and after the alleged flood without ever taking notice of the fact that they were under water for part of this time conclusively proves that there was never any such worldwide flood.

This can only "conclusively prove" anything if your original assertion is proven true. Who says all those civilizations were even in existence before the Flood? Does anybody claim to have an actual date for the Flood?

I provided a list of flood stories from ancient civilizations and people groups from all over the world in the beginning of this thread. If you haven't read them, I suggest you take the time to do so. Many of these flood stories have striking similarities to each other, and to the Biblical flood story. These stories are in existence in the farthest reaches of the globe.

If the Biblical account is true, then the Babylonian, Indian, Chinese, etc. civilizations would either not have been in existence before the Flood, or only in primitive form. The sheer enormity of flood stories, spread all over the world, seems to indicate that there was a commonly shared event in the past, that, as people migrated and established their own civilizations, became ingrained in their consciousness as legend or lore.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I provided a list of flood stories from ancient civilizations and people groups from all over the world in the beginning of this thread. If you haven't read them, I suggest you take the time to do so. Many of these flood stories have striking similarities to each other, and to the Biblical flood story. These stories are in existence in the farthest reaches of the globe.

Given that major, but not worldwide, floods do occur in the farthest reaches of the globe and all share striking similarities to each other, why do we need to invoke some supernatural mechanism to create and then dispose of the huge amount of water needed for a worldwide flood?

If you're going to invoke the supernatural anyhow, why wouldn't it be any more reasonable to hypothesize that Satan (or his equivalent in other religions) tricked humanity into believing that a flood had occured when it had not?

 

[Hope]

In all fairness, Jay, The Oz books were not intended as histories. What do you think the authors of the OT intended? I think they were writing the history of their people to the best of their abilities. What do you think they were doing?

Thank you. I agree. The comparison is not valid.

For me the limitation is that in a relatively pre-literate time, their knowledge was extremely limited. They were recording oral traditions, a mishmash of facts, myths, beliefs, poetry and exaggerations. That's certainly what it reads like. What I don't understand is why anyone would take it as anything else. Maybe someone who thinks it's literally true can tell us why they think so?

Parts of the Bible are literal, other parts aren't. The Psalms aren't literal, for instance. They are poetic. So I don't hold to a strictly literal Bible. And that doesn't make it any less true.

However, oral tradition can be surprisingly accurate. We give ancient peoples far too little credit for their mental abilities. We are dependent on books, computers, and other modern means of storing information, so we have no need to use our brain's full capacity. I've heard stories of people even today who've memorized huge quantities of stuff, passed down to them as oral tradition. It was mind blowing. So I think we shouldn't automatically assume that oral tradition isn't trustworthy.

 

[Hope]

Given that major, but not worldwide, floods do occur in the farthest reaches of the globe and all share striking similarities to each other, why do we need to invoke some supernatural mechanism to create and then dispose of the huge amount of water needed for a worldwide flood?

The striking similarities I'm referring to are things like: a boat with animals and people (usually a family) on board, sending out birds (a raven is often mentioned) to check for dry land, water coming out of the ground, landing on a mountain, offering sacrifices to God (or gods) afterwards, and rainbows. What are the chances that such specific details would be true for every major flood around the world? Hmmm? So improbable as to be virtually impossible.

If you're going to invoke the supernatural anyhow, why wouldn't it be any more reasonable to hypothesize that Satan (or his equivalent in other religions) tricked humanity into believing that a flood had occured when it had not?

Who said the Flood was a strictly supernatural event? Certainly not me. In fact, one doesn't have to invoke the supernatural at all. God is more than capable of using very natural means.

Why would we say Satan tricked us? That's utterly ridiculous. Now who's the one stretching probability now?

 

[Autodidact]

Parts of the Bible are literal, other parts aren't. The Psalms aren't literal, for instance. They are poetic. So I don't hold to a strictly literal Bible. And that doesn't make it any less true.

But what I'm saying is that parts are meant literally, but are simply incorrect. For example, dipping a living bird in the blood of a dead one is NOT in fact a good cure for leprosy. I don't think this passage was meant as a metaphor; it's just wrong.

However, oral tradition can be surprisingly accurate. We give ancient peoples far too little credit for their mental abilities. We are dependent on books, computers, and other modern means of storing information, so we have no need to use our brain's full capacity. I've heard stories of people even today who've memorized huge quantities of stuff, passed down to them as oral tradition. It was mind blowing. So I think we shouldn't automatically assume that oral tradition isn't trustworthy.

I don't think that oral traditions are usually accurate--it's just human nature. One could give hundreds of examples. Those Indians, I don't remember which, who say that the great turtle emerged from the ocean bearing North America on its back--they're no more correct than people who say there was once a world-wide flood. It was their passing on of what someone once thought up.

The chances of these ancient people correctly deducing for example, how rain happens, and then passing this knowledge down orally--it's just very slight. And in fact we see they had no idea of this or much other scientific knowledge gained much later.

For the actual topic of the OP, an example would be the enslavement in Egypt. We Jews have been passing this story down both orally and in writing for around 3000 years. Boy, was I shocked to learn that the archeological evidence doesn't support it! Egyptian court records don't reflect it. There's no evidence of the wandering in the desert, no chariot wheels in the red sea, nothing. I'm guessing we were doing our best to pass on something that happened, but over the centuries it just got garbled.

 

[Autodidact]

Hope:
As I said, the geological, archeological, meterological evidence just doesn't support the idea that there was ever a worldwide flood. No scientific evidence supports this idea. If it did, don't you think the geologists and archeologists etc. would have figured it out?

How on earth do the Chinese keep right on writing, ruling, painting, building, etc. while they're underwater?

Just think about it, Hope, obviously it's a myth--2 or 7 of all the world's animals on one boat??? It's ridiculous. Don't make your religion the religion of Believing Ridiculous Things.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The striking similarities I'm referring to are things like: a boat with animals and people (usually a family) on board, sending out birds (a raven is often mentioned) to check for dry land, water coming out of the ground, landing on a mountain, offering sacrifices to God (or gods) afterwards, and rainbows. What are the chances that such specific details would be true for every major flood around the world? Hmmm? So improbable as to be virtually impossible.

What are the chances that Christians let their own beliefs colour their examination of other cultures?

Who said the Flood was a strictly supernatural event? Certainly not me. In fact, one doesn't have to invoke the supernatural at all. God is more than capable of using very natural means.

I was basing that assertion on common sense: a worldwide flood would require many times the water that exists on Earth now, so you need some mechanism to provide it; if the waters receded after, you need some mechanism to get rid of all the water. I can't see any possible way that either of those things could happen without supernatural intervention.

Even alternative theories, like that at the time of the flood, the oceans were much shallower and therefore a more manageble amount of water was required still don't pass muster, because they still rely on some unknown, and likely impossible, force to heave the sea floor up and down.

Why would we say Satan tricked us? That's utterly ridiculous. Now who's the one stretching probability now?

I have no particular reason to say that Satan did anything (or even that he exists at all), but once we've decided that our conclusions don't necessarily have to meet any normal natural laws, we have carte blanche to come up with whatever explanation suits us.

If you remove all bounds of natural law, reason or common sense, then nothing's "ridiculous" or improbable.

 

[Hope]

Hope:
As I said, the geological, archeological, meterological evidence just doesn't support the idea that there was ever a worldwide flood. No scientific evidence supports this idea. If it did, don't you think the geologists and archeologists etc. would have figured it out?

How on earth do the Chinese keep right on writing, ruling, painting, building, etc. while they're underwater?

Just think about it, Hope, obviously it's a myth--2 or 7 of all the world's animals on one boat??? It's ridiculous. Don't make your religion the religion of Believing Ridiculous Things.

Why is it ridiculous? Did you not read the part where I pointed out that the Chinese civilization as we know it may not have been in existence then? Also, many of the flood stories I mentioned come from China! And India, and Australia, and the Americas, and Europe, and the Eskimos, just to name a few. How are these stories not considered evidence? Something cataclysmic similar to the Biblical story must have happened for all these stories to be so similar and spread around the world. I don't know why people are so deliberately ignoring or dismissing these stories.

As for the animals----I can't explain everything, but there were certainly not as many species back then as there are now.

I've heard conflicting stuff about the geological evidence.

 

[Hope]

What are the chances that Christians let their own beliefs colour their examination of other cultures?

That has nothing whatsoever to do with it. What is there to color, after all? Christians didn't invent the stories, or even change them. I obtained the stories from a non-Christian source. Even a non-Christian looking at all the stories, including the Biblical one, with an open mind, will immediately see that some type of cataclysmic flood happened in the past. There is no other plausible explanation.

I believe the reverse of your statement is true. The fact that you and other non-believers can so easily dismiss such intriguing evidence says to me perhaps your own anti-God bias is preventing you from seeing what is terribly plain and clear. The impression I constantly get is, if it supports the Bible in any way, it must automatically be false.

I don't feel like discussing the issue further. I simply try to be open to evidence, whether for or against the Bible. It's sad others cannot do the same.

 

[camanintx]

I provided a list of flood stories from ancient civilizations and people groups from all over the world in the beginning of this thread. If you haven't read them, I suggest you take the time to do so. Many of these flood stories have striking similarities to each other, and to the Biblical flood story. These stories are in existence in the farthest reaches of the globe.

If we accept that these stories describe the same event, what evidence is there that the Biblical version is truer than one of the earlier versions? Don't historical accounts such as these typically become less accurate the further they are removed from the source?

 

[Autodidact]

That has nothing whatsoever to do with it. What is there to color, after all? Christians didn't invent the stories, or even change them. I obtained the stories from a non-Christian source. Even a non-Christian looking at all the stories, including the Biblical one, with an open mind, will immediately see that some type of cataclysmic flood happened in the past. There is no other plausible explanation.

Actually there's a perfectly reasonable, highly plausible, non-supernatural explanation. Most places on earth have been flooded at one time or another, but never all at the same time.

 

[Autodidact]

Why is it ridiculous? Did you not read the part where I pointed out that the Chinese civilization as we know it may not have been in existence then? Also, many of the flood stories I mentioned come from China! And India, and Australia, and the Americas, and Europe, and the Eskimos, just to name a few. How are these stories not considered evidence? Something cataclysmic similar to the Biblical story must have happened for all these stories to be so similar and spread around the world. I don't know why people are so deliberately ignoring or dismissing these stories.

As for the animals----I can't explain everything, but there were certainly not as many species back then as there are now.

I've heard conflicting stuff about the geological evidence.

*sigh* How is it that the written records of the Chinese (Egyptian, Babylonian, Indian) dynasties do not reflect the fact that the writers were under water when they were written? The records go smoothly right before, through and after the purported flood date, with no notice taken of the purported flood. See the problem?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That has nothing whatsoever to do with it. What is there to color, after all? Christians didn't invent the stories, or even change them. I obtained the stories from a non-Christian source.

There's likely a change in emphasis, for one. Are these stories minor ones that illustrate some specific moral message, for instance, or are they central to their theology? Is every mention of a bird, say, done in the same manner as the Old Testament version?

Even a non-Christian looking at all the stories, including the Biblical one, with an open mind, will immediately see that some type of cataclysmic flood happened in the past. There is no other plausible explanation.

And a Christian looking at all the geological and physical evidence of Earth's history with an open mind will see that a worldwide flood never happened. There is no other plausible explanation. Because of that, we have to look for other reasons (or perhaps just coincidence) to explain the correlation in stories.

I believe the reverse of your statement is true. The fact that you and other non-believers can so easily dismiss such intriguing evidence says to me perhaps your own anti-God bias is preventing you from seeing what is terribly plain and clear. The impression I constantly get is, if it supports the Bible in any way, it must automatically be false.

I'm not ignoring overwhelming evidence, I'm balancing the interesting socio-cultural and anthropological evidence you've described against a much larger (IMO) body of physicial and geological evidence that contradicts it. In that balance, a global flood loses. The similarities between the stories are interesting, but because we can see that a global flood would be physically impossible, we must look for other explanations.

 

[Buttons*]

Because Christ's teachings are not the main point of Christianity, as so many assume. If they were, then, yes, you would be right. The central belief of Christianity is an event: that Jesus died for our sins, rose again, and ascended into heaven. His teachings are simply supplemental to that. Christians are not Christians because they follow teachings----they are Christians because the living Christ indwells them. See the distinction? So, if He is not historical, and His death and resurrection are not historical, then we are fools for believing in Him. Even Paul said this.

I think it depends on the type of Christian you are... Although most people would call me a heretic if I claimed myself as a "Christian" I still do assume the title "annointed one". The way I see it, it's about understanding his teachings and his ressurection within, and ascend ourselves to be annointed with him. So it's a story, but an allegory, a beautiful brilliant allegory that doesn't keep people at a literalistic level. How can one become annointed if they're constantly disagreeing about which denomination is right?

 

[Hope]

If we accept that these stories describe the same event, what evidence is there that the Biblical version is truer than one of the earlier versions? Don't historical accounts such as these typically become less accurate the further they are removed from the source?

Well, obviously, you can't prove one story is more valid than the other. I wasn't trying to say you could. However, the interesting thing I've noticed from reading these stories and comparing them with the Biblical story is how the supposedly "supernatural" and "outrageous" elements of the Biblical story pale in comparison to the supernatural and outrageous elements of most of the other stories. They make the Biblical story seem realistic.

So, of course, I can't prove the Biblical account is the correct one, but if the Flood actually happened, I would say the Biblical account contains the most accurate description, just based on its more realistic portrayal.

 

[Buttons*]

Ok, you asked for it.

I'll try to break these up, otherwise this post will be atrociously long.

Flood stories from ancient peoples around the globe:

Scandinavian:
Oden, Vili, and Ve fought and slew the great ice giant Ymir, and icy water from his wounds drowned most of the Rime Giants. The giant Bergelmir escaped, with his wife and children, on a boat made from a hollowed tree trunk. From them rose the race of frost ogres. Ymir's body became the world we live on. His blood became the oceans.

Celtic:
Heaven and Earth were great giants, and Heaven lay upon the Earth so that their children were crowded between them, and the children and their mother were unhappy in the darkness. The boldest of the sons led his brothers in cutting up Heaven into many pieces. From his skull they made the firmament. His spilling blood caused a great flood which killed all humans except a single pair, who were saved in a ship made by a beneficent Titan. The waters settled in hollows to become the oceans. The son who led in the mutilation of Heaven was a Titan and became their king, but the Titans and gods hated each other, and the king titan was driven from his throne by his son, who was born a god. That Titan at last went to the land of the departed. The Titan who built the ship, whom some consider to be the same as the king Titan, went there also.

Sumerian:
The gods had decided to destroy mankind. The god Enlil warned the priest-king Ziusudra ("Long of Life") of the coming flood by speaking to a wall while Ziusudra listened at the side. He was instructed to build a great ship and carry beasts and birds upon it. Violent winds came, and a flood of rain covered the earth for seven days and nights. Then Ziusudra opened a window in the large boat, allowing sunlight to enter, and he prostrated himself before the sun-god Utu. After landing, he sacrificed a sheep and an ox and bowed before Anu and Enlil. For protecting the animals and the seed of mankind, he was granted eternal life and taken to the country of Dilmun, where the sun rises.

Chaldean:
The god Chronos in a vision warned Xisuthrus, the tenth king of Babylon, of a flood coming on the fifteenth day of the month of Daesius. The god ordered him to write a history and bury it in Sippara, and told him to build and provision a vessel (5 stadia by 2 stadia) for himself, his friends and relations, and all kinds of animals. Xisuthrus asked where he should sail, and Chronos answered, "to the gods, but first pray for all good things to men." Xisuthrus built a ship five furlongs by two furlongs and loaded it as ordered. After the flood had come and abated somewhat, he sent out some birds, which returned. Later, he tried again, and the birds returned with mud on their feet. On the third trial, the birds didn't return. He saw that land had appeared above the waters, so he parted some seams of his ship, saw the shore, and drove his ship aground in the Corcyraean mountains in Armenia. He disembarked with his wife, daughter, and pilot, and offered sacrifices to the gods. Those four were translated to live with the gods. The others at first were grieved when they could not find the four, but they heard Xisuthrus' voice in the air telling them to be pious and to seek his writings at Sippara. Part of the ship remains to this day, and some people make charms from its bitumen.

Alright, here's a question for you. If every culture had a flood story... how does it possibly make sense that only Noah and his relatives survived with two of each animal on an ark?

Also, I'd like to ask when these stories were written? They're ancient of course, but I think it would help me to see if most were either copied or written from a culture's own perspective.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I find myself wondering how many religions have stories of gods taking the form of animals, and what conclusions we'd be able to draw from the fact that that belief is widespread.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

What is this, a treasure hunt? Some reason you can't just state in plain English where you think all that water disappeared to?

Yes, I want you to read the scriptures and discover something for yourself. I'm not your nanny.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I did have a look through Genesis Chapter Six - not there.

But looking through the eighth chapter, it says that the waters abated. That doesn't say where the water went, it just... what? God magicked it away? If it evaporated, it all should have fallen on the earth as rain.

Sorry, my bad, wrong chapter. It does say where it went in Genesis 8:3, "And the waters returned from off the earth continually..." The rain came when the windows of heaven were opened in Genesis 7:11. Heaven is that place that isn't on earth, so the water went back there. Very simple.